Wayfinder Wishbringer
-
Posts
396 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Blogs
Knowledge Base
Blog Comments posted by Wayfinder Wishbringer
-
-
Respectfully, your definition of a game requiring some sort of competition and "winning and losing" is incorrect. There are non-competitive games, goal-oriented games, and games just for the fun of playing. There are indeed some games that have no "end" but are played just for the activity.
Dictionary.com definition of "game": an amusement or pastime
That is the core definition of game. And that's the problem with folks who get hung up on grammar and semantics; they often have a personal concept ad defnition of a thing and try to impose that on others-- whether it's the actual definition or not. The golf analogy most certainly applies. Yes, golf can be competitive. It isn't necessarily. In fact, Golf is a fine example of a game that neither has to be competitive nor goal oriented. Some folks play golf just to play golf and for the exercise.The fact is if Second Life vanished tomorrow, people would survive. It is non-essential to life. It is an amusement, a pasttime. It is a game. Just because some people make a living at it doesn't alter that fact. The fact that some people allow it to become so important it becomes their life is irrelevant (that happens with golf too). It's still a game. -
Rene: I disagree with that statement....I see Second Life as a 3D Virtual World
And many people would disagree and classify "a 3D Virtual World" as a game in its very concept. Still, I recognize and respect your opinion.
I once myself debated that SL wasn't a game, that it was a virtual society, a government of sorts, its own world. Then I chilled out and started looking at things from a broader standpoint. I started considering the core definition of "game" and realized that SL as a whole pretty much met that definition.
Does baseball include "user content?
Does baseball include an economy? (Baseball cards are a "currency" all their own)
Does baseball as a concept include sub-games? (yes, it does)
Does baseball include entertainment, shopping, art, Educational facilities, roleplay, etc?
Yes yes yes yes.
Is baseball a game?
That's why I changed my opnion. Game is a widely-impacting generic term of which, as far as I can tell, Second Life meets all the requirements. To say it absolutely isn't a game, is in my opinion, simply incorrect. It becomes moreso when people try to tell others to stop calling it a game, because that's when they step beyond opinion into censorship. (and I hate to put it like that, but... that's what they're doing... censoring the language choice of others). "Don't call it a game."
Sorry, it's a game. Just that simple. And even if it weren't (let's just take that as a hypothetical concept)... I don't know as people have the right to tell others they can't refer to it as such. That's a bit stepping over the line, isn't it?
-
Gavin: I think it is important to squish the use of the word game or in game when talking about SecondLife because it creates false expectations for new and potential residents on what they will experience here. So they turn away bored.
Or on the other hand... they run away because of people who insist on "squishing" something because it doesn't agree with their personal opinion. ; )
No insult intended Gavin, just making a point. I try to respect the opinions of others. Doesn't mean I'm going to stand idly by and let them try to enforce their opinions on my game. ; )
There are a lot of reasons people leave Second Life. Certainly being bored because it doesn't meet their concept of PvP or goal-oriented environment (like WoW) is a part of that. But I don't think people calling SL a "game" is going to be a major influnecing factor that needs to be squished, by anyone. To be honest, I don't think any of us have the right.
-
Tinkle: The Phoenix Viewer people cheated and have used unheard of dirty tactics in attempting to get there Viewer successful – they actually had the audacity to ASK there client base what they wanted and provide help support – must have caused shock waves through Linden Labs.
LOL. Very well put.
-
Nyte Stalker: LL get in touch with your customers. Be upfront with them. Treat them well and sail into Glory or treat them like crap and sink to the depths...
One of the best analogies I've seen Nyte.
In truth, we're not the "crew". We're the builders of the ship. But you are totally correct that we're all on this ride together. LL needs to either start treating customers with respect (that means listening to what we say)... or indeed, they will sink to the depths.
That doesn't mean they have to do everything we say. It means listening, gleaning the most sensible and needed things, and following through. (It certainly doesn't mean leaving group chat to flounder for what... 3 years and 4 months now...?)
Good post Nyte.
Cathy: having two viewers, one especially geared for new and casual users that is easy to use and a second viewer or content creators is a great idea. Though I wouldn't restrict the content creators viewer to only premium accounts.
Agreed. Actually, we don't even need two viewers. It would be fairly easy to have a BASIC and ADVANCED viewer mode, just as in other products. It defaults to BASIC for newbies, then click a little button and the experieinced user menus come up. Bottom line, LL didn't have to scrap the existing user experience to make way for new users.Daniel: "Games are a subset of entertainment, but people use SL for education, training, and other purposes which have no game aspect, other than it shares technology with video games."
Ah but that's where the supposition fails. Because if you dared to call SL "entertainment"... people would be coming back at you with, "No, I make my living here!" "No, we conduct classes here!" "No, we do this we do that we do etc etc".
People make a living at baseball. They educate using chess concepts. They do this, they do that with a whole ton of games. Doesn't make them not a game.
-
Gavin: The best way to make sure your product meets the needs of your target audience is to expose your designs to the scrutiny of your users. Doing this during every phase of the design process can help reveal which features of your product work well and which need improvement.
When you give people an opportunity to use your product (or a prototype of it) you may uncover usability problems that you did not anticipate during your initial design phase. Finding and eliminating these problems early can save you time and money later on. Clearly identifying the needs of your users helps you create products that deliver effective solutions and are typically easier for them to learn and use. These improvements can translate into competitive advantages, increased sales, and enhanced customer satisfaction.
The only logical outcome of that is to stop doing more development on the v2 interface, freeze it in a stable state, and put your resources into getting v3 right.
For the win there, Gavin.
It's a shame LL ignores such common-sense advice.
-
Syndel: I must correct you here in the fact that Second Life is NOT a game, but a three dimensional, simulated, online environment. Some people play games in SL but SL itself is not a game. That's all I wanted to say.
Hi Syndel. Hey, I've heard this argument done to death and finally just had to speak up. Look, in my opinion Second Life is more accurately a society... but correcting someone and telling him "it's not a game" isn't really correct, is it?
Let me ask you: Golf-- Do people make a living at it? Is it a business? Do people talk about golf and belong to golf social clubs? Are there people who actually run golf stores... licensed businesses selling golf supplies?
Of course, all of that is true.
Is golf a game ?
The same point can be made about any game. Just because there are businesses and social activities involved, doesn't mean it's not a game. Second Life is not essential to life. It's not a tangible real life concept. It is a virtual reality game. People "play" Second Life. It has its tools, its rules, its social aspects and rewards just like any game. It's a game. Sure, it's more complex and more intricate than just about any other game I've seen, but bottom line, regardless of the semantics and folks who passionately scream otherwise... Second Life does indeed fit the definition of being a game.
With all respect, just for the discussion of it. : ) -
Both Cathy and Vivienne make really good points. Here's an interesting SL fact:
Elf Clan has been around six+ years. We have all kinds of interesting events, ranging from a fully scripted, auto-scoring archery range to a fully-equipped Star Trek starship. (Yeah, I know I know, we're a bit ecclectic. )
Know what our most popular event is, consistently, for all six of those years? Drum Circle.
In Drum Circle, people stand around and beat on drums and dance and chat. That's it. Yet for 6+ years it's been our most popular activity, consistently.
That's why IMVU works.
Now Cathy, I do have to seriously disagree with one of your suggestions:
3. Consider banning all in world shopping. But if this happens land tiers and fees must be dropped to a few dollars a month for a sim.
What you're asking them to do is wipe out what SL is and become IMVU. Not gonna happen. (At least, I hope not)
1. In world shopping is the life blood of SL (or at least it was before SL Marketplace)
2. You remove inworld shopping, the merchants stop renting... and Linden Lab goes bankrupt.
3. They cannot rent an entire sim for a few dollars a month. They can certainly drop the price considerably... but that is so anti-Linden in thought process it's not even a pipe dream. They have already proved they will let their grid self destruct before they'll drop a price.
The other suggestions, not bad. But here's a historical fact: I presented to LL long ago that they should charge $5 a month for Premium membership and give members 1024m of land instead of 512. After all, they can stick 64 such people on a sim. What is 64 x $5? (answer: $320). What, they can't handle $320 worth of income for a sim? That's not logical?
Their answer? Meh.
That is how Linden Lab thinks. They very seldom (if ever) make logical, beneficial decisions. Quite the contrary... they seem to spend most of their time dreaming up schemes of how they can soak their existing customers for more money, all the while kicking us in the teeth. (And no, I'm not exaggerating one teeny bit). ; )
So don't hold your breath waiting for them to listen to rational suggestions. It's not their style. ;D
-
@Gavin and Baloo:
Okay folks, I don't know how many times this has to be repeated. All I can say is the Linden Lab propaganda engine works incredibly well to have you both suckered in like this.
"This honestly surprised me. Not for what Linden Research did, they were only enforcing the usage scenarios they advertised for those regions; but what people buying into OpenSpace did. Heck, even the name is indicative of what it was intended for: Sparse regions with little, light weight development. Not malls. Not apartment allotments. Just space where acreage mattered more than object count or scripts."
That is total nonsense. OpenSpace was named because the sims consisted of 3,750 prims instead of 15,000. They were not advertised as "sparce regions with light weight development". They were not advertised as "void sims". They were presented as full-bore, full-power sims that simply had 1/4 the prims of a full sim.
Their demo sim, Mos Ainsley, was prim and script-packed to the gills and had an avatar cap of 40 avatars. At the time they were selling OpenSpace sims, they did have another product called VOID SIMS, which allowed only 1800 prims and indeed, were advertised as "minimal use, minimal build" sims. OpenSpace sims were not "void sims". They were two totally different products.
After the major OpenSpace rebellion Linden Lab tried to present a whole different story (ie, lied through their teeth), claiming that OpenSpace were intended as "void sims" (lie) and that the new Homestead product was more powerful than OpenSpace (lie... in fact it was less powerful). Here's the hilarious part: when people pointed to Mos Ainsley as an example of what they had presented to the public... Linden Lab did a quick song and dance shuffle, changed Mos Ainsley to a full sim and claimed "It was always a full sim... we just never added more than 3700 prims." LOL. Talk about total BS.
And yes Gavin, Baloo, this is documented. I was there. We owned six OpenSpace sims at the time as well as two full sims. I've been a member of SL for over six years and I do know the truth of that mess. The truth was: Linden Lab wanted more money.
Yes, there were some residents that pushed the purpose of those sims. But the only reason they could do so in the first place was because Linden Lab neither advertised limits nor put any limits on those sims other than the prim count. What... they didn't foresee people would use those sims for all they could get? They did later change their advertising to show their altered claims. That wasn't what was orignally there.
So tell me... how does raising the price to $125 manage to curtail supposed abuse of such products? What, it makes the sims faster? Makes them run better? No man, it was pure 100% profiteering on a product that was proving to be a cash cow. All they really had to do was cap the avatars at 10 to 20... and that would have ended the supposed "abuse". But no, they had to force 5,000+ sims to shut down with a blatant profiteering move that came about *.* that close to landing them in a Federal class action lawsuit for false advertising and bait and switch marketing. (It's a shame internal bickering caused that action to fall apart. Drama queens... gotta hate 'em.)
I really find it difficult to believe that there are still people who are gullible enough to swallow the LL propaganda line about what went down back there. Seriously, that was such a major and obvious part of SL history I can't see how anyone could be fooled by LL saving-our-butt claims. The documentation is abundant, it's clear. What, are you guys newbies? Lindens still shoveling out propaganda? You should both know better.
Gavin, I don't know Baloo... but you and I have commented for a while now. You're smarter than to swallow down such corporate nonsense.
-
Hey Baloo. With all respect, I have to pretty much disagree with every point in that post.
"Given how expensive any version of Windows is, I'm pretty sure this was more of a case of "The customer is always right, even when they're wrong." I mean, if you were Microsoft, wouldn't you cave into idiots begging to buy what is effectively a service pack?"
I'd have to consider that pretty much a far stretch of imagination rather than presentation of reality.
"Though if that ad campaign were actually true, it'd be open source. Like the SL viewers."
What does open source have to do with customer feedback and wishes? Listening to customers doesn't mean the company has to be total business idiots and throw their proprietary software out to the wolves. Mind you, I don't think much of Micro$oft marketing and pricing. There are better ways to do it. We saw what happened when LL open-sourced their viewers. It allowed TPVs to take over and jump-started OpenSim. I mean, duh, doesn't anyone learn from history? That one was predictable, even.
The Microsoft user community just said, "Thank you, sir, may I have another?" while hating it all the way.
I won't totally disagree there, but... do you believe they really have a choice? Again, discussing reality here... I have some $5,000 worth of professional software sitting on my Windows system. You're suggesting people just scrap that and switch to Linux? And is the Linux or Apple community really any better? Linux is so fractured they can't even agree on a platform, and Apple charges about three or four times what their hardware is worth. I can't get enthusiastic about any company that pretty much ignores the need for a right mouse button, or a user society that can't get all their ducks in a row. I love how Linux is free, and I love how powerful it is, but the entire community strikes me like a bunch of kids who are arguing over what game they're going to play. While I am by no means a fan of Microsoft-- I don't consider either Apple or Linux a better alternative. Linux is great if you can't afford Windows and you aren't a gamer. Apple is great if people love Apple and money is no issue. Other than that, Windows is pretty much what's on the menu, like it or not.
All in all the new v2 GUI brings a lot to the table, and brings it more inline with the GUI design standards for two of the three supported operating systems (with Windows, as usual, being gratuitously different from the rest of the world)
Sorry, would you please show me where Apple, Linux or Windows has a "Me" menu?
What about the Files, Edit and View and Tools menus available in all three operating systems? (I actually can't remember what menu tabs v2 has now though.)
No, I'm sorry, v2 deviated from the industry standard menu format that was present in all three systems... a menu format familiar to just about every computer user in the world.
So sorry man, all I'm seeing here is a lot of opinion and claims, but I don't see any reality behind it. v2 is by no means a familiar GUI.
-
Casey: "help me understand how that's the problem of us "forum whiners" who are trying to expand everybody's choices and, hopefully, save the future of this virtual world."
That's the core point right there Casey. I asked one person who took the accusation road, "Tell me, what have you done to try to save Second Life from it's very predictable failure?"
Of course, didn't do any good. Sidonie is actually a bit more respectful than most I've seen. With her, I understand that's merely her opinion of what she sees, not an intended insult. Most people who make that "whining" and "complaining" accusation are outright trolls.
One of my favorites is, "If you don't like it, leave." I have to laugh every time someone pulls that old rag out of the bag. My response to one guy just last month:
"So let me get this straight. You are recommending that we, the paying users, rather than fighting to try to preserve this system, should just withdraw our funding of this board... all of us... anyone who dislikes how Second Life is being managed, and go elsewhere? Tell me, what are you going to do when 90% of this grid is empty?"
LOL some folks just never stop to think about what they think. As I told Linden Lab once (and which they are well aware)... when we stop commenting on these blogs... they can consider themselves in real trouble. If that ever happens, they might as well close their doors.
So long as we're commenting, it means we still care and that we think LL still has a chance (however slim) to pull their butts out of the fire. When we stop commenting, it's because we believe LL is beyond the point of no return, and their end is inevitable. They better hope with all their strength we don't stop commenting. Because if we do... it will mean we just plain don't care anymore.
I'll tell them right now... a lot of us are getting very close to that point. I'm part of a two-person partnership involved in managing our group-- one of the oldest groups on SL. My friend has already given up on Linden Lab and Second Life. He's fed up with them. I'm *.* that close to the same thing. The thing that LL needs to worry about-- is that we're rather typical group owners here. If they think we're alone in our opinions... they must be smoking some pretty heavy stuff.
-
Sidone: "erm... don't know why i even bother posting here, hahaha. my thoughts won't change anything which isn't my intention anyway."
I have to admit, I often ask myself that question. I guess it's the eternal hopeful in us that someone in the right spot just might be listening for once. lol
Regarding Havok 4 and Windlight... there were plenty that left. Some people couldn't even log in any more... and that was the last we heard from them. But overall, the Havok update solved more problems than it caused, and Windlight for some reason (don't ask me why... no clue) actually improved performance overall.
However, some other things they weren't so lucky... and what bugs me on most of them is that we tried our best to warn them. The OpenSpace fiasco was of course the most glaring of these. Countless people warned Linden Lab, over a period of two months, that if they stayed with their plans we would close down sims. I did projections warning them of exactly what was going to happen. They didn't give a flying fig. So sims started closing down, and even then they didn't care. I told them exactly how many sims could shut down before they would hit the point of no return-- but they ignored us.
Finally, about the time they hit the 5000 sim loss point, they woke up and decided to change their plans. But the severe damage had already been done. They'd lost thousands and thousands of customers, some 16% of the entire grid landmass (20% of the private landmass), put OpenSim on the map, and made more enemies than any company should ever make. They damaged what little reputation they had beyond any excuse and pushed their company into a 2+ year downward trend that quite likely still hasn't stopped sliding.
If they'd have listened to us then... and if they'd listened to us ever since then, they wouldn't be having these problems right now. There's a basic concept of business that Linden Lab seems just totally clueless to, and I'm tired of telling them so I'm not going to repeat it here.
But one thing I know for absolute certain: the "whiners" here are absolutely right... and have been right for quite some time now. About the only thing more useless than us trying to warn Linden Lab however, is someone telling us we're "whiners"... when that is anything but the truth.
We are long time customers who have every right to let this company know how we feel about their abusive managment method. We are also establishing a history here, so that when things finally do go south (and they will)... there will be no excuse, no saying they weren't told, no claim they had no notice and no warning.
The SL population is one of the most passionate and outspoken I've ever seen. No, Linden Lab won't be able to say they weren't told.
But like you, I often do wonder why we even waste our time here. It's not like these blockheads ever listen to anything their customers tell them. If they did... they wouldn't be in this mess. Second Life is stagnant (to say the least). I don't see how they can even pretend that they're making good decisions.
-
follow up:
BTW (and I don't think this has been mentioned yet)... one of the most telling charts is user hours dropping from 118 million to 105. That's a decrease of... (pulls out the calculator)... eleven percent.
Now in the past, LL has claimed that decreased hours was due to a cutback on bots. I think that's not a factor during 2010, is it? Am I mistaken?
We also note that financial particpation dropped by 5,000 users. Now that's not a huge amount, but I do have to object to the claim it "rose 4% over 2009 averages" instead of the reality that it dropped 5000 members during 2010. I mean okay, grant them a little fudge there, but facts is facts. And as I said before, 2009 was a really lousy year. Four percent increase isn't all that woopy over such a year as 2009. I would have hoped it would increase tremendously over what was one of the worst years in SL history. So I think that's more than just a little fudging there. It's not "inaccurate". It's just leaning the interpretation to their benefit, ie, corporate PR.
-
Back in the 70s (perhaps earlier) research was begun regarding the effect of violent entertainment on the human psyche. Today, 40 years later, that research is pretty much concluded (continually ongoing, but results are in). It is pretty much established that what we take into our brains strongly influences our thinking and most definitely impacts our subconscious. Any claims to the contrary is without foundation.
It's just common sense: our brains are data storage devices. What we choose as our entertainment over time becomes what we prefer. A person who prefers violence as entertainment is far more likely to be violent, than a person who abhors violence in all forms. That's what the studies found. Anything beyond that imo would just be personal conjecture and opinion.
I remember an instance quite some time back, a forum in which we were discussing censorship as a concept. One of the posters claimed he was an adult and "could handle" whatever he wanted to watch. He started ranting and flaming and trolling and stomping his feet, claiming he'd viewed porn and played violent games for years and it had no effect on him. LOL, the clown didn't ever realize he was our best argument. He was obviously damaged... and wasn't even aware that his behavior was not acceptable.
That's the problem with such things. Because one of the things the research found is that while yes, these things do affect persona, judgement values and activities... the people impacted in such a way were by and large totally unaware of the influence such entertainment had on their behavior and thinking. They thought they were "just fine".
But again, and I will repeat, the concept is simple. Our brains are complex data processing devices. What we feed our brains becomes part of our data construct. Over time, it becomes an engrained part of our personality, and part of our core personality traits. The bad news is it's like gaining weight: it takes just as long and as much effort (perhaps more) to undo the damage as it takes to do it in the first place. If we cease such input all together, the mind eventually cleans out the garbage... but the "smell" remains and can influence people for a lifetime.
And saying that, I just realized how far this 300+ post thread has diverged from the initial concept of supposed "SL data figures".
So I'll put back out here: sucky charts. ; )
-
Sidonie: "does microsoft do what their customers tell them? it's LL's product and they make it look like they want to, then you "buy" it or you don't."
Actually, yes, Microsoft does. Or at the very least they listen. That's why we have Windows 7 right on the tail of Vista-- which was a miserable, customer-rejected failure. (Do you remember the Msoft advertising campaign that was focused on "You spoke, we listend-- you designed Windows 7"). So yes, Microsoft does what its customers want --at least to an extent.
Now, the difference between Linden Lab and Microsoft: Linden Lab is not essential software for the majority of its users. For the vast majority of people who use Second Life, the company could totally collapse tomorrow and they'd just go find some other way to spend our time. Sure, there would be a bunch of investments lost and some people would have to go job-hunting. A lot of us who have Second Life as our primary activity would be saddened. But for the most part LL failure wouldn't be any more than a ripple in the history of failed computer companies and the vast majority of users would just move on. Even us entrenched ones would just move over to OpenSim (or in my case, Inworldz). We'd survive.
On the other hand, if Microsoft went down, a lot of people would majorly panic and chances are the computer world as we know it would change drastically... if not collapse. No telling what effect such would have on business... or even the world economy. Likely our government would take them over before they allowed that to happen.
So if Linden Lab has any delusions of grandeur... that might be a wakeup call.
"then you "buy" it or you don't."
Well, from what I've seen of their stats (the non-propagandized real ones), more and more people are making the decision of "don't". And for the record, Microsoft has lost a significant percentage of their market since they released Vista / W7. They lost that market to both Apple and Linux equally. So... go figure. When a company does something their customers don't like, the customers can always make the decision of "exit strategy". Fortunately for Microsoft, they had the wisdom to listen to their customers, wise up and make Windows 7 quite a bit better than Vista.
If they'd have insisted their customers use Vista like Linden Lab is insisting their customers use v2... chances are they would have lost a whole lot more market share before things flattened out. They were smart enough to see that, and try to fix it. I'm not seeing much of that kind of progress with Linden Lab. Microsoft pretty much totally reworked Vista. We don't see that happening with v2... and certainly not with SL bug fixes.
i guess LL can afford to lose a few constant forum whiners...
Sidone, pardon me for being blunt, but... whine whine whine blah blah blah. Whining about "whiners" and complaining about "complainers". Don't you folks ever get tired of that silly mantra?
Linden Lab had an official 88% disapproval rate on Viewer 2. Currently, 80% of their grid refuses to use v2.x... and of the 20% that uses it the majority are newbs who don't know any better, and who aren't paying the bills. So I don't think there's anyone here that are "whiners", do you? If you think the people who have the integrity to stand up on these blogs and speak our minds is by any means an uncommon opinion... that would be seriously mistaken. Or are you unaware that Second Life active sim count has declined since 2008... not increased?
oh, and i like the sidebar too, lol
You know, I'm probably actually one of the exceptions there, because I don't mind the sidebar. I mean, ordinarily it sits there out of sight (like a HUD) and it provides easy access to a ton of stuff. Now, I will admit that it was implemented pretty poorly (no surprise there), but the concept of a sidebar never has bothered me, and I've never really understood why so many people don't like it (of course, poor implementation might be the very reason). But I try not to be goofy enough to believe my opinion is the only opinion. Obviously a whole bunch of people don't like it... so if I were making the decisions at Linden Lab (hey, we can all dream), that would be one of the issues I'd be looking at right now... and I'd see if there was a way to reach a valid compromise that the customers would not only live with... but find useful.
-
Well, if they're returning to the PC platform, maybe they're listening to what their customers have been saying. Because prior, and without publicly announced reversal that I'm aware of, they announced:
1) They would be abandoning the PC platform but leaving the current lands intact
2) They would no longer be charging their customers at all for PC-based lands
So they announced to the public they were totally abandoning the PC platform permanently. If they've changed that plan... news to me. Probably news to a lot of folks.
-
Daniel: The clothing and room sales will bring in some revenue to content creators, and hopefully will attract some users to the PC version, where you can do much more.
Uh, you mean the PC platform that's been discontinued by Blue Mars? ; )
-
v2.5 translated: Five versions of FAIL.
Perish forbid Linden Lab should listen to 90% of their population. Any product with an 88% customer rejection rate needs to be trash canned and begun anew. Any product which people dislike so much that they're using third party products instead... needs to be revisited and reinvented.
Or doesn't LL grasp those concepts?
-
Gregg: "Ok Ok - I have to yield to your argument- you are much better qualified than me to comment on the technical aspects of the viewer."
No, no, actually I totally respect your viewpoint on the viewer-- for you. I know there are some people who actually like V2 (one of my good friends, an experienced user, likes it... which makes me question her sanity, but.. ;D),
For some people, especially newbs, it seems easier to use. Until they get into the need for heavier tools, then as you state... ouch. And I think that was the issue. It wasn't the viewer itself, per se. (although it certainly has a lot wrong with it). It was that they threw 7 years of user experience and need totally out the window. Viewer 2 is usable (for basic needs) and some people even like it better (from what I can tell, about 5-10% of the population). But that LL just totally ignored the wishes and needs of almost 90% of their population and said "Here, you're going to use this!"... and then gave us a product that was in no way related to the benefit of the grid.. wow. They were basically saying, "We're going to attract new customers and hang the existing user base." Yeah, give the to the ones paying the bills... that's always good business policy.
But I have never told anyone who liked viewer 2 that they were wrong. If they like V2... they like V2. It's just that simple. Different strokes and all that.
What I can state with accuracy is this: When a company has 80% of their customer base totally reject their own product and insist on using a third-party product instead... that should be a fairly large clue they're doing something wrong. I am just astounded at Linden Lab's (forgive me being blunt) incredible stubborn stupidity in this matter.
Example: how many people have told LL, over and over, "We'll be happy to use V2 if you just go back to the V1 interface." Now, how hard is that to do, exactly? Shuffle some menus and links? ONE DAY JOB. They have almost their entire user base screaming this demand, but Linden Lab is still, "Nah... we're going to do it our way." I kid you not, someone at that company-- no, several someones-- needs severely fired for being dumber than a box of rocks and blatantly ignoring cusomter demands. I don't care whether they like the V1 interface or not. WE DO.
Well, no, actually, we don't. It's just a far sight better than V2. Maybe they could take some hints from the TPV people and wise up a bit. If there is something I really hate, it's moronic management that insists on continuing to be morons even when their project has obviously failed. As my dad used to say, "There's no cure for terminally stupid."
Rene: IMO LL should stop any further development of the V2 viewer and let the TPV's run with it and produce their own versions, which we know will eventually dominate the market anyway. LL would be better off diverting their already thin workforce to other areas of SL that need improvement.
Daniel: "That's a silly statement. Only Linden Lab has access to the server code, and therefore only they can write the code for the viewer to keep it in sync with the server code."
No Daniel, Rene's statement is what you call common-sense business. It makes a whole lot more sense than what LL is currently doing. Consider what you are presenting: instead of turning viewer maintenance over to a TPV company, you're proposing they continue pouring money and time into a viewer the vast majority of the populace has flatly rejected and insists on using a TPV anyway.
How is Rene's proposal all that silly? She's just suggesting that LL wise up and let the people do the job who are already doing the job anyway. In doing so they free up a considerable portion of their tech force to work on other areas... like getting flippin' group chat and notices to actually work after more than 3 years of failure. Rene's suggestion sounds pretty intelligent to me.
IMO, they should choose a TPV company, officially assign them to do all future viewer development, PAY THEM for their work as a third-party associate company, and make a whole lot of people very happy. Now mind you, LL has secret agendas that is preventing them from taking that wise step... but hey, that's not our problem. They are the ones that are having almost their entire populace openly reject their own product. We can just keep using TPVs, thankyewverymuch. V2 can take a hike, no matter how much Linden Lab tries to foist it onto the grid. Face it, the TPVs have beat them at their own game. Time for LL to realize that and either accept it... or clean up their own act and fix the v2 interface and performance.
No single viewer will satisfy everyone, because we think different and have different needs, so hopefully the current system of LL supplied core and a vibrant TPV community will take care of those diverse needs.
Perhaps. Or... LL could have just done it right in the first place. Frankly, I think one product could very well take care of our diverse needs. I mean... yes they're diverse, but it's all the same environment, yes? I think we could come to an agreement on what features we want in a viewer and produce one viewer that would handle it.
Mike: A better model is to keep OpenSim working properly -- which requires cooperation among LL and the many other competent virtual world purveyors
Actually, that's becoming less and less of the case. There is at least one popular grid out there that has bascially taken the position of "We don't care what LL does... we're branching off and doing what our customers need." They're basically ignoring SL as much as they possibly can, have hired their own devs, and (properly imo) have told LL to take a flying leap. They have removed themselves from the "walled garden" control... and are forming their own goals and concepts. OpenSim is becoming, as a whole, less and less cooperative with SL. Why? Because LL doesn't play well with others. Shoot, they don't even play well with their own customers and employees.
"I do agree that different users want different things in a viewer, and perhaps we'll see some differentiation in the future"
That's true, but I would bet dimes to donuts that the entire populace would be willing to settle for one really good viewer that meets 99% of our personal wishes. That would be a sight better than one that fails for 88% of us.
Gavin: "On an interesting sidenote, Bluemars have released the client for iPod, iPhone and iPad today in the App store."
Oh goody! Now people can walk around aimlessly on their mobile systems too! ;D
-
Owww Gregg, so wrong in so many ways. ; )
I state that respectfully, because well, generally nice post. Just wrong.
Here's why I think so:
You've been on SL as long as I have, so we have two "old-timers" with totally different opinions in this. But you state:
I think that the people who don't seem to like it have not taken the time and effort to really get familiar with all the features that it has.
Incorrect. I gave v2.x every chance in the book, even installing it numerous times. (I hate to restate this, but...) I worked for almost 3 decades as a professional corporate consultant. I wrote computer programs. I wrote computer manuals. I know good design when I see it... and bad design. I was expecting severe change in v2 and had psyched myself up for it. No amount of psyche could prepare me for the monstrosity LL unleashed on the grid... a product so bad that at SLCC they themselves admitted the way they handled the viewer development was totally incorrect (how often do you hear LL admit they were wrong? Not often). V2 is just incredibly bad concept and incredibly bad design.
Mind you, I wasn't all that impressed with v1... but at least it worked to an extent. Now that said, I have had more than one qualified tech tell me that the foundation of v2 is more solid than v1... so it's core-level a step in the right direction. But those same techs admit that Linden Lab was total blockhead in totally abandoning the v1 interface. I have to agree. The v1 Interface was basically logical.. with some areas that needed readjusting (such as we see done in the TPVs).
So I can assure you it's not because we haven't given v2 a fair shake. That's poppycock, and is just more "blaming the customers" for Linden Lab's total blundering error.
It's as much the managements fault as it is the users. The users have created 90% of the content, so how can the burden be on anyone else? Other than creating the environment? Both are crucial.
No, it is 100% the fault of management. SL failures have nothing to do with customer content. In truth, customer content is the only thing IMO that is keeping SL afloat currently. The problems with Second Life have nothing to do with content; they have to do with company self-serving policy, customer-abusive decisions, and self-destructive nature brought about by total failure to foresee the consquences their decisions bring upon the grid. I am fed UP TO HERE with people blaming customers for Linden Lab's failure-- and to be honest, sometimes makes me wonder if Linden Lab hires such people to keep throwing those claims out on the blogs.
Linden Lab's problems are self-created, and inflicted on their customers, not the other way around. They told us this is "our world", but they keep sticking their fingers in our pie and then blaming us when we become outraged at their inexcusable attitude and activity.
So no, this isn't at all the fault of the customers. This, good sir, is total Linden Lab.
So, I respectfully disagree, with pretty much 100% of your post. No offense. ; )
-
Tinkle: Hi Wayfinder, along with all the other faults that have been brought up above, I do feel that there arrogant, dictatorial managerial skills is yet another factor in driving people away.
I can't argue with that. If nothing else, maybe this blog will provide Rod with a reasonably good launch pad of customer grievances. I think I've not seen many SL blogs with comments as insightful as this one... on many sides of the issue. I wish I could say I wish Rod well... but at this point, I just hope he doesn't wind up running out screaming and permanently damaged. ;D
BTW, just as a note Tinkle, that account you provided is right in line with my experiences of LL authority process. I was once, long ago, banned from JIRA for telling a Linden he was lying to customers on the JIRA... when he was. I appealed the decision with a 9-page certified letter detailing the issues... and Linden Lab didn't even give me the professional courtesy of a reply. About a year later, one of the more responsible and stable Lindens that I've met reviewed the case and reinstated me. But if not for his personal sensitivity, I'd be banned there to this day for catching one of the big dogs right in the act... and their "appeals" process meant zip. They didn't even give me the courtesy of an honest hearing. So yeah, that blog is right on the button.
Now that said, I have long stated and firmly believe that in areas other than JIRA, Linden Lab seems to have a fairly thick skin; it's one of their finer points. If they ever lose that exceptionally fine trait-- their company will flat out die. I mean, look what's happening over in Egypt right now as a result of attempting to silence a people in open revolt.
So if there is any credit that I give Linden Lab at all... it is their rather tolerant nature in these blogs. Which is why it surprises me somewhat that they took such an intolerant stance with Darius. Some Linden must have been having a bad day. Doesn't excuse the company ignoring his appeal. Frankly, in his forum post, I thought Darius exercised uncommon restraint.
-
Hi Tinkle. I'm sorry to read what happened to that user and it certainly seems like typical Linden Lab "justice". But I have to ask: what does that have to do with this thread or the current discussion?
-
(Oh, and if anyone at LL is listening, you might want to fix your code.)
Here is an example of Linden Lab fixing their code.
-
In all fairness, I don't think Rene was saying we just ignore the situation. I think the point being made is that we should not be forced to unnecessarily curtail our activities here because Linden Lab hasn't done its job... and parents haven't done their job... to monitor users here.
The reality: Linden Lab does not require real life registration info... except for access to the "adult" continent (I don't know though, what's their policy on "mature" sims now?). This lax policy of theirs has caused severe problems on SL for years-- especially in the issue of griefing and fraud. Their failure to patrol their own grid and to moderate obvious issues has lead to severe problems of land theft, L$ con games, extreme griefing, and much more... not to mention encouraging pedophiles to run rampant (which they did, for quite some time, until the "no Age Play" policy came into effect).
So I am certainly not going to tell someone who is supposed to be a responsible adult that they can't take whatever role they want to take... including the role of a child... because Linden Lab has failed for seven years to shore up their security and eliminate issues that would cause problems in such areas.
Bottom line: if Linden Lab had done their job in the first place, this wouldn't be an issue. They could simply say "Everyone registers, just like on WoW... and Age Play or any other pedophelia will get you perma-banned and possibly turned over to the authorities."
That is how one takes care of such problems-- not by telling peopele they can't pretend to be a child. Imo, people have just as much right to role-play a child avatar as people have a right to be (as Rene stated) a furry, gorean, robot, nightclub stud/bimbo, or for that matter... an Elf.
Facebook
Instagram
Twitter
YouTube
Flickr
The Second Life Economy in Q4 2010
in Featured News
A group blog by Secondlife in General
Posted
Gavin: What you call it is irrelevant. What Linden Lab market it as is imperative for the success of this place.
So if what we call it is irrelevant, people should stop telling others to not call it a game.
When Linden Lab starts calling it a game... you can take it up with them. ;D